Chapter Two

2.1:

Review of Literature

Many researches have been done to understand the concept of Quality of Work Life. A
number of researchers have made efforts to measure it and have tried to find out the
factors influencing it. Research on Quality of Work Life (QWL) has been done in several
sectors but limited research has been done to find out the predictors of Quality of Work
Life in Higher Education Sector. The review has led to the development of an
understanding of various aspects of Quality of Work Life and also in the identification of
the research gap. The present study aims at filling the research gap.
Determinants of Quality of Work Life
Sinha and Sayeed (1980) tried to develop an inventory to measure the QWL for the
Indian sample. Eighteen different dimensions of QWL were identified and presented
before two judges separately to cross check their adequacy relating to the needs and
factors to be included for assessing the quality of working life. These dimensions were;
economic benefits, physical working conditions, mental state, career orientation,
advancement on merit, job stress, effect on personal life, union management relations,
self respect, supervisory relationship, intra group relations, apathy, confidence in
management, meaningful development, control, influence and participation, employee
commitment, general life satisfaction and organizational climate. The final QWL
inventory was administered on a sample of two industries in an industrial complex at
36

Allahabad (UP). The data was subjected to item analysis which indicated that 17
dimensions of QWL excluding job stress to be retained. Significant t ratios were found
between the two organizations which indicated that the inventory discriminated between
the high and low QWL organizations.
Wilcock and Wright (1991) assessed quality of work life of 275 randomly selected
employees in the Knitwear sector of the Canadian Textile Industry. They identified three
levels of QWL activities, which were; (1) active companies but non-unionized with high
annual sales, (2) mid range private companies unionized with a medium level of
technology, (3) Inactive young private companies with low technology. Each level of
QWL activity was assessed by comprehensive components of Walton model naming;
compensation, working conditions, skilled development and application, opportunity for
advancement, social integration amongst peers, constitutionalism, work and social life
and social relevance of work. It was found that the employees of mid range companies
were more satisfied with the working conditions, social integration, constitutionalism,
and work & life characteristics of their jobs than were the employees of the active
companies. There were minimal attempts made to encourage employee participation and
decision making in inactive young privately owned companies.
Hart (1992) reported the positive and negative work experiences and their contribution
towards quality of work life of 1539 Victorian primary and secondary school teachers as
part of the evaluation of three organizational health programs in Australia. Negative work
experiences were measured with the help of five sub scale from the teacher stress
inventory employed by Wearing et al. (1990). The sub scales were; authoritarian
37

leadership (3 items), ministry demands (5 items), parent demands (5 items), poor staff
relations (5 items) and student behavior (4 items). Similarly positive work experiences
were measured with the help of 9 sub scales from the school organizational health
questionnaire by Hart et al. (1992). The sub scales were; curriculum consultation (2
items), participative decision making (4 items), discipline policy (4 items), feedback (6
items), goal congruence (5 items), professional development (5 items), professional
interaction (7 items), role clarity (4 items) and supportive leadership (5 items). Whereas
QWL was measured with scale adopted from Diener et al., (1985), satisfaction with life
scale by replacing the word life in each item with the phrase life at work. The research
was aimed to confirm that stress and morale operate on different dimensions and are
separate outcomes of positive and negative work experiences. It was confirmed that
positive experience was stronger determinants of morale than stress, whereas negative
experiences were stronger determinant of stress than morale. Stress and morale
contributed equally to a teachers overall QWL. It was further found that positive
experiences contributed only to morale whereas negative exercises contributed only to
stress.
Chander (1993) examined the teachers perception to the actual and expected QWL in a
university along with determining the priorities given to the various determinants of
QWL using a sample of 75 teachers. Using Factor analysis, he found that the QWL in the
university was not very satisfactory on account of lacking four major determinants of
QWL, i.e. decision making authority, growth and development, recognition and
appreciation and promotional avenues.

38

Gani and Ahmed (1995) empirically examined various components and correlates of
QWL, in a large Central Public Sector undertaking located in Jammu & Kashmir. For the
purpose of the study, 15 independent variables were adopted from Kaira et al. (1984),
Carison (1978), and Walton (1973) with some modifications to suit the local conditions.
These correlates were combined in four categories; working environment factors,
relational factors, job factors, and financial factors. The results drew attention to the fact
that adequate financial returns from the job, besides desires for job security, better
working conditions and, advancement opportunities continued to be the major
considerations in employees working lives.
Piccinini (1996) reported the quality of work life of the managers and employees of the
best companies of Brazil. Out of 130 organizations selected at the first stage, only 30
companies had been selected on the basis of some features which were; wages, benefits,
good climate work, perspectives of career development, possibility of development and
professional accomplishment that made them the best companies to work in Brazil. The
data was analyzed considering the Waltons theoretical approach on quality of work life.
The results revealed that Brazilian companies tend to offer benefits with emphasis on
workers health plans, followed by training and development, good human relationship
and career opportunities.
Cohen (1997) validated the self management leadership theory in a large telephone
company using a sample of 390 self managing and 412 traditionally managed employees
and 94 external leaders from 58 self managing and 60 traditionally managed teams. Self
managing leadership involves a formal leader who is located above the group in the
39

organization hierarchy to manage members of self managing teams. These teams are
interdependent, work on group tasks that are high in autonomy and identity. Self
managing leadership was assessed using Manzs and Sims (1987) self managed
leadership questionnaire. QWL was measured with three items of job satisfaction, four
items of growth needs satisfaction, three items of social need satisfaction, three items of
group satisfaction and five items of organizational commitment. Respondents evaluated
self managing work teams as more effective than traditional work teams. Self managing
leadership behavior was found to be positively associated with QWL and self rated
effectiveness for both teams. It was further found that self management leadership is a
hierarchical concept, constituted of specific strategies as well as a general orientation
towards empowering employees.
Lau and May (1998) attempted to examine the relationship between Quality of Work
Life (QWL) and market & financial performance. The characteristics used to assess the
QWL were; pay and benefits, opportunities, job security, pride in work and company,
openness and fairness, camaraderie and friendliness. The researchers evaluated the
performances in terms of growth and profitability of two groups of companies. The first
group consisted of fifty eight companies known as the best companies to work for in the
United States; the second group comprised of eighty eight of standard and poors top one
hundred companies. The investigation revealed and confirmed a commonly held belief
that companies with high QWL leads to employee satisfaction will in turn have higher
customer satisfaction, which in turn will provide higher growth and profitability to the
companies.

40

Gallie (2000) compared employees perceptions of the quality of working tasks, the
degree of involvement in decision making, career opportunities and job security to see
whether Denmark, Sweden, Finland have a distinctive pattern from other European
Union countries. The survey involved a random sample of approximately 1000 people
including both employed and self employed. It was found that employees in
Scandinavian countries had not secured better employment conditions, but they were
clearly in a position of relative advantage with respect to the quality of work task and
involvement in decision making in the organization. There bad not been an equivalent
emphasis on the issue of job security.
Bram (2001) conducted telephone panel survey of over 800 Dutch workers in paid
employment for at least 12 hours a week to analyze the association of work system
with several employee outcome variables including; quality of working life, well being
and worker attitudes. The work systems were categorized as; traditional
tayloristic system, lean team, socio technical team work and the professional work
system. The analysis showed that tayloristic work system has detrimental effects on
employee well-being, suggesting that the introduction of team work will have positive
effects on employee well-being. This is even true for the introduction of a work system
that delegates substantial individual autonomy to the workers without, at the same time,
introducing teamwork.
Lewis et al. (2001) examined the effect of extrinsic traits and intrinsic satisfaction and
quality of work life in seven different health care settings located in South Central region
41

of Ontario, Canada. A questionnaire representing eight general topic areas, such as

coworkers and supervisor support, teamwork and communication, job demands and
decision authority, patient/resident care, characteristics of the organization, compensation
and benefits, staff training and development, and overall impressions of the organization,
was developed. These factors were analyzed as intrinsic and extrinsic variable and
regressed against a satisfaction scale with socio demographic variables included. The
results of the factor analysis showed that skilled discretion, decision latitude and decision
authority load most strongly on the intrinsic components whereas ratings of
communication, organizations relation with staff, supervision and pay and benefits load
on the extrinsic components. The output of the linear regression showed the extrinsic
factors retain its association with QWL as does - the intrinsic variables, albeit to a lesser
extent. As far as demographics were concerned, it was found that men were a little less
satisfied than were women and better educated workers more so than others.
Sirgy et al (2001) developed a new measure of QWL based on need satisfaction and spill
over theories. The measure was designed to capture the extent to which the work
environment, job requirements, supervisory behavior and ancillary programs in an
organization are perceived to meet the needs of an employee. The study identified 7
major needs which were; (a) health and safety (b) economic and family needs (c) social
needs (d) esteem needs (e) actualization needs (f) knowledge needs and (g) aesthetic
needs. The results of the pooled samples of 180 and 46 faculty and staff members from
two different universities and 15 accountants from different accounting firms in United
States provided validation support for QWL measure which was based on simple notion

42

that the organization provides resources to employees who in turn satisfy employees
many needs. Need satisfaction resulted in satisfaction with the job as well as other life
domains, thus satisfaction with life in general.
Wang and Ye (2001) investigated 156 volunteers QWL in the volunteer club of the
Chinese Taipei school sport Federation and explored the role of six background terms
(gender, age, education, service times, competitions and volunteer working experiences)
in determining the satisfaction level about eight dimensions. It was found that the
volunteers had a good work satisfaction level as a whole. Among average of each
dimension, the highest one was earning opportunities and the lowest one was work
content and the satisfaction level, the sequence of other dimensions were; interpersonal
relationship, personal growth, supervision condition, organizational identification reward
and followed by work influence. It was further concluded that a) female volunteers had
higher QWL than males b) All the volunteers over 22 year old studied in universities or
held Bachelor degrees had lower QWL c) The volunteers who had served 5 times or more
had higher QWL than the volunteers who had served less than 5 times d) The volunteers
who had working experience in different competitions or events had different QWL e)
The volunteers who had the experience of voluntary work had lower QWL than those
who hadnt had any voluntary working experience.
Wyatt and Wah (2001) examined the perceptions of 332 managerial executives of
Singapore about their QWL. A 35 item questionnaire derived and adopted from an earlier
QWL study (Miller, 1978) was used to measure QWL. As the outcome of the principle
components factor analysis with varimax rotation, four factors were derived and were
43

respectively labeled as favorable work environment, personal growth and autonomy,

nature of job and stimulating opportunities. The implications of the findings for the
management are the need to consider the types of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may
contribute to four aspects of QWL that comprised the motivational reward incentive
system used in the organization.
Considine and Callus (2002) conducted telephonic survey of Australian employees by
adopting stratified random sampling technique in terms of location, state of residence,
gender and age representing national workforce of 1001 employed. The survey sought to
gauge workers feelings about a range of 14 key items that affect their QWL. These items
were; fair and reasonable pay, concern over losing ones job, sexual harassment or
discrimination at the work place, trust in senior management, interesting and satisfying
work, people at work place getting on together, recognition of efforts by immediate
managers, career prospects over the next two years, amount of control, health and safety
standards, balance between time spent at work and with family, immediate manager/
supervisors treatment of staff amount of work to be done and level of stress. Australian
workers had reported relatively good quality of working life. The results revealed that the
majority of Australian workers felt that having good relationships at work and having
interesting and satisfying work were the most important issues for a high quality of
working life.
Sturman (2002) measured employees perceived quality of working life among primary
and 285 secondary school teachers in England. A two part questionnaire was devised.
The first part incorporated the quality of working life questionnaire developed by
44

McDonald (NFERNELSON, 2001) presenting statements about various aspects of

working life. The second part of the questionnaire collected information, in order to allow
comparison of teachers in different contexts. The main findings of the study were; 1)
teachers experience more job security and support at work and have positive working
relationship with colleagues; 2) teachers were dissatisfied with their salaries,
responsibility and involvement; 3) roles and responsibilities negative impact on quality
of working life as do hours worked; and 4) senior staff in primary school enjoy a higher
quality of working life than others in several respects. Teachers on the whole rated their
QWL positively with respect to job satisfaction, job security and to feel supported and
informed. Also on the negative side teachers report feeling stressed and to be dissatisfied
with their salaries and additional benefits, roles and hours worked.
Saklani (2004) attempted to empirically evaluate the importance of various QWL factors
pertaining to employees and to measure the status of their existence in work
organizations in India. The study was based on data collected from 294 respondents of
both managerial and non managerial categories drawn from 24 organizations of different
types. The combination of financial and nonfinancial factors relating to job contents as
well as job context were taken to assess the QWL in this study. These were adequate and
fair compensation, fringe benefits and welfare measures, job security, physical work
environment, work load and job stress, opportunity to use and develop human capacity,
opportunity for continued growth, human relations and social aspect of work life,
participation in decision making, reward and penalty system, equity, justice and
grievance handling, work and total life space and image of organization. The study

45

suggested that apart from monetary considerations, employees in India accord a high
value to the factors that satisfy self esteem and self- actualization needs of a higher order.
Hence, the existing status of QWL in Indian organizations is not poor.
Hoonakker et al. (2004) examined the factors related to the work environment that may
contribute to high turnover of women in the IT work force. The study was based on
secondary data collected in an earlier study from a sample of 1110 employees of a single
organization in Madison. The job diagnostic survey (Hackman and Oldham, 1975) was
conducted to measure the job characteristics which were; feedback, autonomy, skill
variety, task significance and task identity. The researchers suggested that task identity
seems to play an important role in predicting QWL for women in IT work force, but not
for other groups.
Beasley et al. (2005) explored the QWL of 682 independent and employed family
physicians and its relationship to employment by health care organizations in Wisconsin
Academy of Family Physicians. The analysis was carried out with the help of 13
questions covering in three categories which were; work satisfaction issues, practice
issues and outcomes. Under work satisfaction issues, four questions addressing
satisfaction with income, amount of family time, quality of relationships within the group
and continuity of care were asked. Practice issues covered five questions relating to work
under time pressure, amount of paper work, influence over management decisions, ability
of match time to complexity of patient and opportunity to use skills. Similarly four
questions addressing outcomes were satisfaction with being a physician, perceived
quality of care, ability to achieve professional goals and intention to leave the practice. It
46

was found that the independent physicians worked longer hours, were in smaller work
groups and had been in practice longer. Independent physicians have significantly more
positive ratings of several aspects (better working relationships, more satisfaction with
family time, more influence over management decisions, better satisfaction with being a
physician, better perceived quality of care they. provided, greater ability to achieve goals
and lesser intention to leave the practice) of the quality of their work life compared with
physicians employed by health care organizations. It was further concluded that health
care organizations need to address these issues if they are to have a satisfied and stable
work force.
Lees and Kearns (2005) strived to recognize the significance of quality of work life with
the systematic approach at Blue water Health in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. The study
outlines the processes used to investigate, diagnose and implement a pathway to improve
quality of work life of hospital staff and physicians. The Diagnostic approach Model
having 12 step including survey as one step was used. Set of 14 measures including
organizational commitment, support, trust, leadership, monetary compensation, non
monetary compensation, attendance management, communication - with peer,
communication

with

management,

communication

with

managers,

overall

communication, information seeking, respect and recognition were surveyed. The

measures which were found relevant and important for high QWL were open
communication, respect, recognition, trust, support, well being and satisfaction of its
members, both personally and professionally.

47

Beh (2006) empirically predicted QWL in relation to career related dimensions with the
help of a sample of 475 managers from the free trade zones in Malaysia for both the
multinational corporations and the small and medium industries. The scale used to
measure QWL was adopted from theoretical frame work of the study of Walton (1975)
and QWL index for health care providers by Labiris et al. (2002). The career related
dimensions considered were; career satisfaction (9 items), career achievement (13 items)
and career balance (15 items). The results of this study have indicated that career
achievement, career satisfaction and career balance have significant impact on QWL. It
was further concluded that the degree to which the individual believes his or her QWL
criteria have been met, more so if the individual places utmost importance on pay,
personal growth and opportunity are deemed to be good indicators. In terms of practical
implications this knowledge will be valuable to the top management attempting to attain
a career fit between the needs of the employee and organization.
Campos and Souza (2006) determined the preponderant variables in QWL of army
personnel from South Brazil using Waltons criteria. A proportional segmented random
sample of 73 people of the permanent personnel of Military Organization was selected
for an analysis of the questionnaire prepared on the basis of 8 criteria idealized by Walton
(1973). The criteria of QWL considered included; fair and appropriate compensation,
work conditions, use and development of capacities, chance of growth and security,
social integration in the organization, constitutionalism, work and total space of life, and
social relevance of the work life. The factor analysis showed that the factors to be

48

prioritized are: social integration in the work, stability, communication channels,

geographic changes and autonomy.
Che Rose et al. (2006) determined the level and relationship between quality of work life
with career related variables on the sample consisting of 475 executives from the
electrical and electronics industry in the free trade zones in Malaysia for both
multinational corporations and the small medium industries. It was found that the most
important predictor of QWL is organizational climate, followed by career achievement,
career satisfaction and career balance. It was further concluded that the essential
predictors of QWL appears to be career related and these career elements are not in
isolation but in harmony with the organization climate. By taking this into account the
managers and executives met expectations of their career development. QWL can be
heightened through harmonious organizational climate that serves as a psychological
dynamism.
Saraji and Dargahi (2006) conducted a cross sectional, descriptive and analytical study
among 908 Iran Hospitals employees to provide an insight into the positive and negative
attitudes towards their quality of life. So these attitudes were measured with help of 14
factors naming; fair and reasonable pay compared with others, concern over losing ones
job, sexual harassment or indiscrimination at the work place, interesting and satisfying
work, trust in senior management, people at the work place wish to get on together,
recognition of efforts, career prospects, amount of control over work, health and safety
standards at work, balance between work and non work life, intermediate
manager/supervisors treatment of staff, amount of work to be done and level of stress at
49

work. The results indicated that majority of workers were unsatisfied with occupational
health and safety standards at work, intermediate and senior managers, their income,
balance between the time they spent working and with family and also showed that their
work was not interesting and satisfying. Hence, the overall quality of work life of hospital
employees was very poor.
Argentero et al. (2007) attempted to analyze the quality of work life indicators in a
cohort of Italian health workers with the help of semi-structured interviews of 112 health
operators in North West Italy. The macro areas which were relevant to define work life
quality of the sample, i.e. relationship with colleagues, work organization, taking care of
patients, professional ability and professional growth, were considered. In particular, the
collected data have contributed to point out how the subjective perception of the quality
of work life is influenced mostly by the amount of the demanded performances. The
relevant indicators seem to be those describing the work aspects of addressing to patients,
as opposed to their professional ability and relating to patients, which; were the areas
considered most satisfactory by the workers. In addition to the analysis of the aspects
which were considered important by the - workers in defining their quality of work life,
the interviews permitted a global score for quality of work life, i.e. it does not appear to
be influenced by sex, role, age, or number of working years in a specific department.
Dargahi and Saragi (2007) identified pathways for 942 employees of Tehran University
of Medical Sciences (TUMS) interested in improving the QWL Set of 12 dissatisfaction
measures developed by QWL strategic planning committee were; organizational
commitment, trust, support, monetary compensation, non monetary compensation,
50

leadership, attendance management, communication between managers and employees,

communication between managers and managers, overall communication, respect and
recognition. It was found that the perceived strongest area among 12 categories to
improve on the QWL were communication, leadership, monetary and non monetary
compensation and support.
Joshi (2007) explored the issue of representation of legitimate interests of women
workers in its entirety in trade unions and make suggestions to help policy makers to
improve the quality of work life of women workers. The study was carried out in the
organized public sector confining its scope to services and manufacturing sectors, more
specifically to Banking, Insurance, Public Sector Units (PSUs) and Hospitals of Haryana.
The dimensions commonly used for all the sectors to assess the QWL were; security of
employment, understanding colleagues, job / role clarity, training facilities, safety at
work, promotions opportunities, social and welfare facilities and grievances redressal.
The study revealed that the level of satisfaction of women employees with QWL in their
respective organizations was quite high in spite of the overall work life conditions as
provided by the company/management being only average. The wider issues having
implications for the entire workforce were taken care of in their negotiations by the
existing union of which they were members, the women specific issues were generally
ignored.
Khani et al. (2007) explored the quality of work life of nurses working in the ISFAHAN
Hospitals operating in an Iranian state by taking a sample of 120 registered nurses. Using
Brooks and Anderson scale (2005) with 4 subscales which are; (1) work life/home life,
51

(2) work design (3) work context, and (4) work world, and a demographic questionnaire
consisting of age, gender, marital status and work experience was distributed. It was
found that nurses job satisfaction, salary, workload, staffing issues, skill mix,
communication, autonomy, recognition and empowerment remained problematic.
Van laar et al. (2007) developed and tested the psychometric properties of the work
related quality of life scale for the healthcare workers by using data for 953 healthcare
workers from a 2003 survey. Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis
confirmed six factor measurement model of work related quality of life. The factors
generated were; job and career satisfaction, general well-being, home work interface;
stress at work; control at work and working conditions. The work related quality of life
measure is one of the psychometrically valid and reliable quality of working life scale in
the literature and can be appropriately used in healthcare organizations.
Connell and Haniff (2008) examined whether and how the quality of working life varies
between call centers in two Australian in-house/outsourced, public and private sectors
and the implications of these findings on human resource management. Two call centers,
one in-house public sector and other an outsourced private sector were considered for
empirical qualitative case study,. The in-house public sector call centre emerges as being
inferior in terms of job content, working hours and style and strategies. On the other hand
an outsourced private sector call centre fears a management model that is more akin to
what would be expected in a call centre operating under a professional service model.
Hence, it was concluded that union presence and public sector status did not guarantee
better working conditions and higher QWL.
52

Dhar (2008) conducted a qualitative study with the help of fifteen bus drivers from four
different Pune Municipal Corporation depots. The objective of the study was to see how
QWL of the drivers could be improved and ultimately leading to better transport service
to the citizens and a reduction in the rates of accidents. Analysis of the interviews
covered four main themes (a) work demands and QWL (b) coping strategies to reduce
stress (c) organizational initiatives to reduce stress and (d) humor, team work and work
life balance. It was concluded that QWL initiatives can provide certain positive
experiences for staff, especially when they promote the opportunity to socialize and build
connections with co workers and help to fulfill employee needs for humor and balance.
Dolan et al. (2008) investigated relationships between job demands, employees
motivation and resources and supervisory support with employees quality of work lives
and their general health by using large survey data from the public health care employees
in Catalonia (Spain). The results suggested that regardless of individuals motivation,
capabilities and resources, a supportive work culture and careful considerations to the
design, quality and quantity of work demands may. have significant impact on the
feelings towards ones QWL as well as on health consequences in the health sector. This
study also discussed some possible preventive strategies to improve the QWL and reduce
negative health outcomes within the Public Health Sector.
Ramstad (2009) examined factors that could promote concurrent improvements in both
performance and the QWL considering a sample of 1113 responses from 409
development projects in Finland. The purpose of the study was to answer the question;
how can organizations be developed in such a way that it improves simultaneously
53

performance and the quality of working life. The focus was primarily on diverse
organizational and managerial practices and the nature of development process relating to
work, management and organizational practices. It was found that comprehensive
development of organization, i.e. implementation phase, close collaboration during the
process, the methods used by the experts and external networking were related to
simultaneous outcomes at work place.
Anbarasan et al. (2009) probed QWL of the sales executives being their job profile
highly challenging and insecure, by taking a sample of 100 sales executives belonging to
different sectors, namely pharmaceuticals, banking, insurance and finance. The study
attempted to construct and validate a consolidated scale to measure the major dimensions
of QWL of sales executives with minimum number of items which is applicable to Indian
sample. The factor analysis resulted in five factors representing; employees satisfaction
and continuance, perceived job motivators, job awareness and commitment, less
conducive work environment and perceived organizational culture. The most important
component of QWL dealing with the organizational characteristics was found to be
employee satisfaction and continuance. It was also proved that the sales representatives
among the four sectors differ only in their perception about employee satisfaction and
continuance, whereas their perceptions regarding rest of the components were almost
same irrespective of their sectors.
Azril et al. (2010) considered a sample of 180 government extension agriculture
employees to probe whether QWL does have impact on their work performance or not.
The study was carried out considering various aspects of work life, like individual and
54

family life, safety and security, job satisfaction, interpersonal relationship, organizational
policies and management style, personal health and well being, work environment,
remuneration and organizational support. It was found that all the nine qualities of work
life studied have significant and positive relationship with work performance.
Kheradamand et al. (2010) tested the relationship between QWL and job performance
for a sample of 35 employees in Dadeveez Jooya Company in Iran. Two factor model of
the relation between QWL and job performance based on Walton (1975) model of QWL
and Hersey and Goldsmith (1980) Achieve model of job performance respectively was
operationalized. The Walton model of QWL comprised eight dimensions which were;
satisfaction with fair payment, a safe and healthy working environment, an opportunity
for continuous growth, balanced role of work, social coherent in the work organization,
regulations and rule orientation and developing human capacities. The variables which
were included in the model of job performance were; ability, clarity, help, incentive,
evaluation, validity and environment. The findings of the research were found to be
consistent with those from previous studies on QWL and job performance there by
showing positive relationship between the two. This research exhibits optimism
concerning the potential of QWL enhancing the performance of employees significantly
and reduce absenteeism, minor accidents, grievances and quitting.
Subramanian and Anjani (2010) analyzed QWL considering job satisfaction,
compensation, human relation, working condition, grievance, competency development,
stress and well-being as different constructs of QWL, by taking a sample of 500
employees from textile and engineering industry in Coimbatore district of Tamil Nadu.
55

The findings suggest that QWL has been better in engineering than in textile industry.
The grey areas with respect to QWL in both the industries that need special attention
have been pointed which involve both hygienic and motivational factors, such as training
and development, dual relations, work environment, work schedule and counseling. It
was suggested that concerted and concrete efforts for enhancement of QWL would do a
lot to improve the morale and motivation of the employees and as a result there would be
improvement in the QWL of the textile and engineering industry in India.
Adhikari and Gautam (2010) reviewed the existing Nepalese Labour Laws, their
implementation and examination of the nature of jobs and expectations of trade union
leaders regarding improvement in QWL of Nepalese employees. Both secondary and
primary data were collected and analyzed to examine status of QWL in Nepal. For
primary data, 40 trade union leaders from different manufacturing companies were
selected to respond to the questionnaire containing questions relating to QWL factors,
such as nature of job, job factors and their expectations from the labor legislations. It was
revealed that most of the union leaders felt the need for proper mechanism for the
enforcement of legislation and introduction of some other provisions that were not
included in existing labor legislations. They believed that pay and benefits and job
security are considered the most important motivating factors to improve the level of
QWL. It was further concluded that consideration is needed to improve QWL through
education, training and other skill development programmes.
Ganguly (2010) investigated the perceived QWL and job satisfaction of employees of
university of Calcutta, Kolkata, India. QWL questionnaire incorporated eight dimensions;
56

work complexity, autonomy, personal growth, opportunity, top management support,

workers control, concern about organizational performance, personal relation at job and
general happiness to assess the perception of the respondents. The results indicated that
the selected group of university employees perceived different aspects of their quality of
work life as either uncongenial to autonomy, top management support and workers
control or having negative opinion for personal growth opportunities and work
complexity. The results of job satisfaction scale were also not up to the expectations and
there was positive relationship between job satisfaction and QWL variables.
Bharathi et al. (2011) appraised the quality of work life of college teachers using 16
different dimensions; adequate and fair compensation, fair and healthy working
conditions, opportunity for development, opportunities for growth and security, social
integration, constitutionalism, work and total life space, social relevance and working
life, QWL feeling, curricular aspects, teaching learning and evaluation, research
consultancy and extension, infrastructure and learning resources, student support and
progression, organization and management and healthy practices which consist of 116
questions. The study attempted to describe various characteristics related to QWL and
QWL in teaching environment. A sample of 239 respondents was collected from 12
colleges located within Tiruchirappalli city, Tamil Nadu. The questionnaire was divided
in to two parts, i.e. QWL questionnaire and QWL in teaching environment questionnaire.
With regard to overall QWL 59 percent of the respondents have high QWL and 41
percent have low level of QWL. With regard to overall QWL in teaching environment
54.8 percent of the respondents have high level of QWL in teaching environment and

57

45.2 percent of the respondents have low level of QWL in teaching environment. It was
found that 59 percent of the respondents reported to have overall high quality of work life
as compared to 54.8 percent of the respondents who have high QWL in the teaching
environment.
Tabassum et al. (2011) strived to compare the QWL between the employees of the local
private and foreign commercial banks through quantitative survey of 50 local and 50
foreign banks employees in Dhaka city of Bangladesh. The QWL dimensions considered
in the study were; adequate and fair compensation, work and total life space, opportunity
of continuous growth and job security, opportunity to develop human capacities, safe and
healthy working conditions, flexible work schedule and work assignment, attention to job
design and employee relations. It was revealed that overall QWL of local private bank
employees was low as compared to foreign commercial bank employees. The study
revealed significant differences in overall QWL and the determinants of QWL, except for
opportunity for continuous growth and job security and safe and healthy working
environment. It was suggested that the local private commercial banks should try to
eliminate these differences since bank employees are playing a significant role for
economic growth by contributing their knowledge, skills and efforts.
Chaturvedi and Yadav (2011) measured the level of QWL along with the gender
differences in terms of satisfaction with QWL between male and female workers. A
sample of 220 employees of 3 and 4 star hotels of India was taken. Four dimensions of
QWL, namely satisfaction from job, lack of clarity in direction, job stress and overall
QWL feeling were considered. It was found that there exists positive relationship
58

between job satisfaction and QWL whereas factors, like lack of clarity in direction and
stressed work environment reduce QWL. It was concluded that female workers were
more affected by feeling of lack of satisfaction, lack of clarity in direction and job stress
than male workers.
Reena and Jayan (2012) investigated the role of QWL on job attitude and personal
effectiveness for 457 professors, associate professors and assistant professors of
engineering colleges in Kerala. There were 14 dimensions in QWL inventory consisting
of 83 items. Job attitude scale (Jayan, 2004) consisting of three dimensions, i.e. job
commitment, job involvement and job satisfaction was used. The personal effectiveness
inventory (Andros, 1999) consisting five variables, was adapted to measure personal
effectiveness. It was revealed that there exists a high positive relationship between QWL,
job attitude and personal effectiveness.
Sinha (2012) examined the reasons why employees perceive high quality of working life
experiences. A sample of 100 employees holding middle managerial positions employed
in various organizations of India was examined. Twelve QWL factors; communication,
career development and growth, organizational commitment, emotional supervisory
support, flexible work arrangements, family responsive culture, employee motivation,
organizational climate, organizational support, job satisfaction, rewards and benefits and
compensation, were factors analyzed. The factor analysis yielded three factors which
were named as relationship sustenance orientation, futuristic and professional
orientation and self deterministic and systematic orientation. Relationship sustenance
orientation factor comprised five variables, namely job satisfaction, family responsive
59

culture, employee motivation, organizational support and compensation. Futuristic and

professional orientation factor included four variables, namely career development and
growth, flexible work arrangements, emotional supervisory support and rewards and
benefits. The factor self deterministic and systematic orientation comprised three
variables namely communication, organizational commitment and organizational climate.
The findings of the study added another perspective to the managements literature
regarding factors that affect the construct of QWL on context free or general well-being
of employees. This is so because employees are in better position to observe and
experience the work behaviors and attitudes towards affecting QWL in the organizations.
Stephen and Dhanapal (2012) investigated the status of QWL in small scale industrial
units from the point of view of employer and employees. The sample consisted of 317
employer and employees of various small scale industrial units in Chennai, Coimbatore
and Madurai cities in Tamil Nadu, India. A total of 39 variables (adequacy of
information, fairness of information, neatness and cleanliness, participation in decision
making, fringe benefits, achievements, recognition, risk of life hazards, comparatively
higher benefits, comfortable space, equitable treatment, working hours, reasonable task,
grievance handling, sense of belongingness, basis of termination of job, work schedule,
provision of training and development, autonomy and freedom, work group relations, role
clarity, feedback system, relation with boss, concern for environmental issues, promotion
opportunities, support for social issues, protection of consumer interest, union
management relations, impact of technology changes, living in the network of friends,
interpersonal openness, job stress, career planning, time for family, skill variety,

60

governance by rule of law, challenge in job, discipline enforcement and absence of

prejudices) were considered to measure QWL. Significant differences were found from
the perspective of employers and employees about the variables in consideration except
for risk of life hazards, sense of belongingness, basis of termination of job, work
schedule, support for social issues, protection of consumer interest, union management
relations, living in the network of friends and interpersonal openness. Ten factors (social
support, interpersonal relationship, recognition, autonomy, working environment,
relationship with boss, working hours, governance by rule of law, role clarity, and fringe
benefits) emerged as significant determinants of QWL.

2.2: Objectives of the Study

The study intended to study the following objectives. These objectives were decided
based on the needs of the study. The review done above tries to fulfill these objectives.
The overall objective of the study is to find out the predictors of Quality of Work Life in
higher education sector in Gwalior. The specific objectives are as follows:
1. To identify the predictors of QWL in higher education sector.
2. To study the impact of Adequate and Fair Compensation, Safe and Healthy Working
Conditions, Opportunities to Use and Develop Human Capacities, Opportunities for
Career Growth, Social integration in Work force, Constitutionalism in the Work
organization, Space that Work occupies in your life and Social Relevance and Importance
of your work on Quality of Work Life.

61

3. To investigate the effect of age, gender, marital status, educational qualification,

designation, experience level, income levels and teaching experience in the current
organization on Quality of Work Life of faculty members in higher education sector.
4. To investigate that out of all the components of Quality of Work Life which one is a
better predictor of QWL in higher education sector.

62

References
Adhikari, D.R. and Dhruba, K.G. (2010), Labor Legislations for Improving Quality of
Work Life in Nepal, Intational Journal of Law and Management, 52(1), 40-53.
Anbarasan, V. and Mehta, N. (2009), An Exploratory Study on Perceived Quality of
Working Life among Sales Professionals Employed in Phannaceutical, Banking,
Finance and Insurance Companies in Mumbai, Abhigyan, 27(1), 70-81.
Argentero, P., Miglioretti, M. and Angilletta, C. (2007), Quality of Work Life in a
Cohort of Italian Health Workers, Supplemento A, Pricologia, 29 (1), 50-54.
Azril Hayrol., M.S, Jegak, U., Asiah, M., Azman Noor, A., Bahaman, A.S., Jamilah, O.
and Thomas, K. (2010), Can Quality of Work Life Affect Work Performance
among Govermnent Agriculture Extension Officers: A Case from Malaysia?
Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1), 64-73.
Beasley, J.W., Karsh, B.T., Hagenauer, E.M., Marchand, L. and Sainfort, F. (2005),
Quality of Work Life of Family Physicians in Wisconsin, A Wren Study,
Annals of Family Medicines, 3(6), 500-506.
Beh, LooSee. (2006), Predicting Quality of Work Life, The Implications of Career
Dimensions, Proceedings of the International Conference on Business and
Information, 3(1) Academy of Taiwan Information systems Research.

63

Bharathi, P.S., Umaselvi, M. afld Kumar, N.S. (2011), Quality of Work Life, Perceptjo
of College Teachers, Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies 2(1),
47-65.
Bram, Steijn (2001), Work Systems, Quality of Working Life and Attitudes of Workers,
an Empirical Study towards the Effects of Team and Non-Team Works, New
Technology, Work and Employment, 16(3), 191-203.
Campos, L.C.A. and Souza, A.M. (2006), Study of the Waltons Criteria of Quality of
Working Life Using Multivariate Analysis in a Military Organization, Third
International Conference on Production Research- Americas Region.
Chander, Subash and Singh, Parampal (1993), Quality of Work Life in a University, an
Empirical Investigation, Management and Labour Studies, 18(2), 97-107.
Chaturvedi, V. and Yadav, D. 5. (2011), A Study on Impact of Job Satisfaction on
Quality of Work Life among Employees in Hotel Industry (With Reference to
Categorized Hotels in Faridabad region), International Journal of Research in
Computer Application and Management, 1(4), 101-104.
Cohen, Susan G., Lei, Chang and Gerald E. Ledford Jr. (1997), A Hierarchical
Construct of Self-Management Leadership and Its Relationship to Quality of
Work Life and Perceived Work Group Effectiveness, Personnel Psychology,
50(2), 275-308.

64

Connell, Julia and Hannif, Zeenobiyah (2008), Call centers, Quality of Work Life and
HRM Practices, An In-House/Outsourced Comparison, Employee Relations, 3
1(4), 363-381.
Considine, Gilhan and Callus, Ron (2002), The Quality of Work Life of Australian
Employees - The Development of an Index, Working Paper 73, Work Place
Research Centre, The University of Sydney.
Dargahi, H. and Saragi, J. N. (2007), An Approach Model for Employees Improving
Quality of Work Life (QWL), Iranian Journal of Public Health, 36(4), 81-86.
Dolan, Simon L., Garcia Salvador, Cabezas Carmen and Tzafir Shay, S. (2008),
Predictors of Quality of Work and Poor Health among Primary Health-Care
Personnel in Catalonia. Evidence Based on Cross-Sectional, Retrospective and
Longitudinal Design, International Journal of health care Quality Assurance,
21(2), 203-218.
Gallie, D. (2000), The Quality of Working Life, Is Scandinavia Different? Paper
presented at the Center for Advanced Study in the Social Sciences, Juan March
Institute.
Ganguly, Rochita (2010), Quality of Work life and Job Satisfaction of a Group of
University Employees, Asian Journal of Management Research, 1(1), 209- 216.
Gani, A. and Ahmed, R. (1995), Correlates of Quality of Work Life, an Analytical
Study, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 31(1), 1-17
65

Hart, P. M,, Conn, M. and Carter, N. (1992), The School Organizational Health
Questionnaire, Manual, Available from Peter M Hart, Department of Psychology,
University of Melbourne.
Hoonaker Peter, Marisn Alexande, and Carayon Pascale (2004), The Relation between
Job Characteristics and Quality of Working Life, the Role of Task Identity to
Explain Gender and Job Type Differences, Proceedings of the Human Factors
and Ergonomics Society, Annual Meeting.
Joshi, Rama 3 (2007), QWL of Women Workers, Role of Trade Unions, Indian
Journal of Industrial Relation, 42(3), 355-382.
Khani A., Jaafarpour M. and Dyrekvandmogadam A. (2007), Quality of Nursing Work
Life, Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 2(6), 1169-1174.
Kheradmand, E., Valilou, M. and Lotfi, A. (2010), The Relation between .Quality of
Work life and Job Performance, Middle-East Journal of ScientWc Research,
6(4), 317-323.
Lau,

R. S. M. and May, Bruce E. (1998), A Win-Win Paradigm for QWL and

Business Performance, Human Resources Development Quarterly, 9 (3), 211226.

Lees, Martin and Keams, Sandra (2005), Improving Work Life Quality, A Diagnostic
Approach Model, Case Study Library, Longwoods Publishing, 1-16.

66

Lewis Dawid, Brazil Kevin, Krueger Paul, Lohfeld Lynne, and Tjam Erin, (2001),
Extrinsic., and Intrinsic Determinants of Quality of Work Life, Leadership in
Health Services, 14 (2), 9-15.
Piccinini, Valmiria C. (1996), The Best Companies to Work in Brazil and Quality of
Working Life, Disjunctions between Theory and Practice, Productivity Review,
New York, Autumn, 93-105.
Raduan, C.R., LooSee, U., Jegak, U. and Khairuddin, (2006) Quality of Work Life,
Implications of Career Dimensions, Journal of Social Sciences, 2 (2), 61-67.
Ramstad, E. (2009), Promoting Performance and the Quality of Working Life
Simultaneously, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 58(5), 423-436.
Reena, Jayan (2012), Role of Quality of Work Life on the Job Attitude and Personal a
Effectiveness of Engineering College Teachers, South Asian Academic Research
Journals, 2(6), 121-134.
Saklani, D. R. (2004), QWL in the Indian Context- An Empirical Investigation,
Decision, 3 1(2), 101-135.
Saraji, G. Nasl. and Dargahi, H. (2006), Study of Quality of Work Life, Iranian Journal
of Public Health, 35(4), 8-14.

67

Sinha, C. (2012), Factors Affecting Quality of Work Life, Empirical Evidence from an
Indian Organization, Australian Journal of Business and Management Research,
1(11), 31-40.
Sinha, Parkash and Sayeed, Omer Bin (1980), Measuring Quality of Working Life,
Development of an Inventory, The Indian Journal of Social Work, 6 1(2), 219226.
Sirgy, M. Joseph, David Efraty, Phillip Siegel and Dong-Jin Lee (2001), A New
Measure of Quality of Work Life (QWL) Based on Need Satisfaction and
Spillover Theories, Social Indicators Research, 55 (3), 241-302.
Stephen, A. and Dhanapal, D. (2012), Quality of Work in Small Scale Industrial Units,
Employers and Employees Perspectives, European Journal of Social Sciences, 2
8(2), 262-271.
Sturman (2002), Contended and Committed? A Survey of Quality of Working Life
amongst Teachers, National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER).
Subramanian, Mu. and Anjani, N. (2010), Constructs of Quality of Work Life- A
Perspective of Textile and Engineering Employees, Asian Journal of
Management Research, 299-307.
Tabassum, A., Rabman, T. and Jahan, K. (2011), A Comparative Analysis of Quality of
Work Life among the Employees of Local Private and Foreign Commercial
Banks in Bangladesh, World Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), [Link]
68

Mumford, E. (1979), The Quality of Working Lfe in Western and Eastern Europe,
ABP.
Van Laar, D., Edwards, J., and Easton, S. (2007), The Work-Related Quality of Life
Scale for Healthcare Workers, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60(3), 325-333.
Wang, Ya-I and Ye,Yi-jin (2001), Volunteers Quality of Work Life in the Volunteer
Club of Chinese Taipei School Sport Federation, Working Paper, retrieved on
May 5, 2009. from [Link]
Wilcock, Anne and Wright, Marina (1991), Quality of Work Life in the Knitwear Sector
of the Canadian Textile lndustry, Public Personnel Management, 20(4), 457-468.
Wyatt, T.A. and Wah, C.Y. (2001), Perceptions of QWL, A Study of Singaporean
Employees Development, Research and Practice in Human Resource
Management, 9(2), 59-76.

69